UnJustified Podcast, Episode 41: The Fall of Rome

Date: November 2, 2025
Hosts: Allison Gill & Andrew McCabe
Podcast: MSW Media

Episode Overview

This episode of "UnJustified" delves into the ongoing erosion of civil liberties and the rule of law under the Trump Department of Justice, focusing on high-profile legal battles involving James Comey and Letitia James. Allison Gill and Andrew McCabe scrutinize the details of recent indictments, grand jury irregularities, prosecutorial conduct, and the broader, often ironic, cultural narratives invoked by the political right. The episode also spotlights the Department of Justice's self-censorship and concludes with listener questions regarding the Supreme Court’s “shadow docket."

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Legal Maneuverings in United States v. Comey

(05:35–13:41)

• Filing Motions & Bronston Literal Truth Doctrine:
  • Jim Comey's legal team is seeking dismissal based on the Bronston v. United States precedent, which holds that perjury charges can only be sustained if a prosecutor’s question is precise and the answer is literally false.
  • Comey claims the grand jury indictment is based on ambiguous, compound questions—primarily from Senator Ted Cruz—and that his answers were, at worst, literally true and not meant to deceive.
  • Notable quote ([07:41] A):

    "Senator Cruz never indicated that he wanted Mr. Comey to address the statements or activities of any person except for Mr. McCabe. Viewed in context, Senator Cruz's questions cannot form the basis for a violation of Section 1001 because they were fundamentally ambiguous." — Allison Gill, reading from Comey's motion.

• Selective Prosecution:
  • Comparison to similar cases (e.g., Jeff Sessions) demonstrates a lack of consistency in bringing charges, suggesting selective prosecution.
  • Memorable moment ([13:43] A):

    “The movie that bankrupted [Bronston] was called the Fall of the Roman Empire, which is particularly ironic given the MAGA obsession with the Roman Empire.”

2. Grand Jury Misconduct & Allegations of Prosecutorial Irregularities

(20:01–34:42)

• Questions About the Grand Jury Process:
  • Allegations against interim U.S. Attorney Lindsay Halligan for procedural anomalies such as keeping the grand jury past normal business hours and resubmitting conflicting indictments.
  • Major concern around an FBI agent testifying despite being exposed to privileged communications—potentially tainting the grand jury process.
  • Notable quote ([27:50] B):

    “The agent who served as a witness in the proceedings may have been exposed to Mr. Comey's privileged communications with his attorneys and thus may have conveyed that information to the grand jury.”

• Discussion Around Dismissal and Future Implications:
  • The outcome could have ripple effects for other cases, such as those involving Letitia James.
  • Legal strategy involves stacking multiple grounds for dismissal, providing the court with several “even if” rationales.

3. Indictment Against Letitia James: The ‘Three Little Words’ Defense

(37:26–41:55)

• Mortgage Fraud Case Unravelling:
  • Halligan, as prosecutor, claims James committed mortgage fraud by renting out a second home against loan terms.
  • Investigation by Politico and legal experts found the contract explicitly allows short-term rentals ("including short term rentals"), likely invalidating the core of the case.
  • Notable quote ([39:07] B):

    “That final three word phrase in the rider, ‘including short-term rentals,’ could be decisive. In plain English, the provision means that James is explicitly permitted to rent the place out periodically as a short-term rental…”

4. January 6th & Department of Justice Self-Censorship

(42:14–47:07)

• Taylor Taranto Sentencing and DOJ’s Political Pressure:
  • Two Assistant US Attorneys were suspended for referencing the Capitol riot and Trump’s social media posts in sentencing memos.
  • Judge Carl Nichols praised the attorneys’ professionalism and indicated concern over the memo’s swift replacement, possibly due to higher-level political pressure.
  • Notable quote ([44:19] A):

    “Judge Carl Nichols openly commended the suspended prosecutors before handing down his sentence, describing their work as the best and saying they held the higher standard of professionalism.”

• Whitewashing of January 6th Events:
  • Discussion about the chilling effect and self-censorship within the DOJ, comparing it to the “don’t mention Russia” attitude during Trump’s first term.

5. Listener Q&A: The Supreme Court’s ‘Shadow Docket’

(47:33–56:42)

• Q&A Segment – Supreme Court’s “Shadow Docket”:
  • Clarifies that the “shadow docket” is the Court’s emergency docket, meant for urgent matters but recently used far more frequently for major decisions without full briefing or oral arguments.
  • The increased use undermines the Supreme Court’s legitimacy as it allows for impactful decisions to be made without transparency.
  • Recommendation: Steve Vladek’s substack and book “The Shadow Docket” for more information.
  • Notable quote ([54:25] B):

    “They’re basically pre-deciding that question of legality within the context of the TRO. They are deciding, okay, yeah, but you really have the better argument—without the benefit of any submissions, any papers, any argument… and that upends the entire Supreme Court process.”

Memorable Moments & Quotes

• On the Irony of Bronston’s Case
  [13:43] A:

  “The movie that bankrupted him was called the Fall of the Roman Empire...here we are with the President ordering the prosecution of his political enemies...possibly being brought down in part by a case about a guy who went bankrupt over a film about the fall of the Roman Empire. It’s kind of poetic. It’s kind of poetic.”

• On DOJ Self-Censorship
  [46:18] A:

  "It reminds me of the first administration and any mention of Russia in any document...it’s like self-censorship. This is what happens. They all eventually learned you don't mention Russia around Donald Trump.”

• On the Show’s Mission
  [04:51] B:

  “Good for you, everyone who’s hearing this, because you’re people who are dedicated to staying informed, to keeping up with these things. And we try to, of course, help you do that.”

Timestamps for Key Segments

• [05:35] – Bronston v. United States and its relevance to Comey's defense
• [13:43] – Irony linking MAGA rhetoric and Bronston’s bankruptcy film, “The Fall of the Roman Empire”
• [20:01] – Grand jury irregularities and motions to open records
• [27:50] – Potential grand jury taint due to privileged information
• [37:26] – Letitia James' mortgage contract debunks the fraud allegation
• [42:14] – DOJ prosecutors suspended over referencing Jan. 6 and Trump’s posts
• [47:33] – Listener question regarding the Supreme Court’s shadow docket, including advice on resources

Tone and Style

• The episode is sharp, irreverent, and deeply informed, with hosts blending legal precision and dark humor.
• Allison and Andy frequently reference pop culture and their own prior experiences, lending a conversational but authoritative tone.
• The language is accessible but detailed, aiming to clarify complex legal maneuvers for listeners.

Conclusion

In this episode, "UnJustified" offers a comprehensive look at how Trump-era policies and personnel continue to shake foundational pillars of the justice system—from ambiguous indictments and unqualified prosecutors to the chilling effect imposed on federal attorneys and even the reshaping of Supreme Court procedures. Listeners are reminded of the importance of vigilance and staying informed, as these legal battles and procedural shifts have far-reaching consequences for American democracy and the rule of law.